The Strategic Issues & International Relations Forum is a venue to discuss issues pertaining to India's security environment, her strategic outlook on global affairs and as well as the effect of international relations in the Indian Subcontinent. We request members to kindly stay within the mandate of this forum and keep their exchanges of views, on a civilised level, however vehemently any disagreement may be felt. All feedback regarding forum usage may be sent to the moderators using the Feedback Form or by clicking the Report Post Icon in any objectionable post for proper action. Please note that the views expressed by the Members and Moderators on these discussion boards are that of the individuals only and do not reflect the official policy or view of the Bharat-Rakshak.com Website. Copyright Violation is strictly prohibited and may result in revocation of your posting rights - please read the FAQ for full details. Users must also abide by the Forum Guidelines at all times.

The Philippines' Permanent Representative's reaction is very interesting. There could be two components to this. One, a resentment towards the US. Two, the extreme fear of China. Shows how much the Chinese juggernaut can terrorize very small nations. It is very rare to see such a pathetic reaction from a diplomat so openly. China is bludgeoning small neighbours into submission as they have always done. The CPC Communist Imperialists are colonizers to the very core.

Maritime security is going to be the core discussion in the upcoming ASEAN-India Commemorative Summit in two weeks' time. Would be interesting to watch the reactions of Philippines, apart from Laos, Cambodia and even Thailand.

New York: In an emerging strategic transformation, India is now considering itself as maritime power and building up its navy to meet that challenge after having thought of itself for a long time as a land power, according to a former senior US diplomat who is a leading expert on South Asia.

India increasingly sees its role across the Indian Ocean as a “net provider of regional security,” which is echoed by the US Secretaries of Defence and State when they talk about its role in the region, Alyssa Ayres, a former Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for South Asia, said on Wednesday.

“There is a transformation of the way the Indian Navy talks about the seas, from using the seas to securing the seas — this whole idea of New Delhi now playing a role in protecting the freedom of navigation as opposed to just the sealanes that the Indian Navy uses,” she said.

Ms. Ayres, who is now a senior fellow with the Council on Foreign Relations and the author of the recently-published Our Time Has Come: How India is Making Its Place in the World, was speaking at the Asia Society here on “India 2018” a look at the year ahead.

China’s provocative activities

When thinking about the strategic future, there is concern about China’s activities in East and Southeast Asia, the expert said.

As a result, the US and India share an interest in ensuring that the sealanes remain open.

“India like the US is a vocal advocate of freedom of navigation,” she said. “The US and India are both very focused on this issue.”

“What you have seen in the last four-five months is an increasing convergence, where [President Donald] Trump’s administration has picked up what the Indian, the Japanese and the Australian government talk about, a concept of the Indo-Pacific region,” she said.

While the US traditionally spoke of the Asia-Pacific region, the Australians, Japanese and Indian leaders had a broader concept of the Indo-Pacific region, Ms. Ayres said.

‘Akin to US’

“The US is now using that same term [and] what that does is that it expands the field of reference, it places India in a much more central role,” she said.

“It acknowledges the fact that India is a major defence partner in this larger [Indo-Pacific] region and that the US and India will continue to partner closely.”

Ms. Ayres said that the defence relations between Washington and New Delhi have grown through the last three US presidencies and Mr. Trump is continuing it.

A measure of the closeness can be seen in the joint military exercises they hold, she said.

“India now exercises more with the US than with any other partner and the talking point on the US side is that it exercises more with India than with any other non-NATO partner.”

Philippines representative’s take

The Philippines Permanent Representative to the UN, Teodoro L. Locsin Jr., questioned the basis of an Indo-Pacific concept saying it was “nowhere comparable to Asia-Pacific relationship to western economies.”

“I think the US focus on an Indian military alliance or relationship is really a distraction for the Chinese,” he said. “The Indian Ocean is just too big a neck to choke. So the real problem really remains the straits and the South China Sea.”

“Whatever is raised about the possibility of a Japan, Australia, India military combination to counter the Chinese concern, the usual reaction from the Philippines and the others is resentment,” he said.

“We do not want to get involved in any quarrel with China that involves India.”

“To get connected to India is really asking for trouble from China,” he added.

This will be another Chinese base, no doubt about that. This will be a precursor to Afghanistan being admitted as a full-fledged member of SCO.

China will fund the construction of an Afghan counterterrorism base in Badakhshan province to block cross-border infiltration of ethnic Uyghur militants.

Fergana News Agency (FNA) has quoted Gen. Dawlat Waziri of the Afghan Defence Ministry as saying that China will provide financial support to build the base, whose precise location inside Badakhshan, in northern Afghanistan, is yet to the determined.

Gen. Waziri said the Chinese side would cover all material and technical expenses for this base — weaponry, uniforms for soldiers, military equipment and everything else necessary for its functioning. The decision to build the facility was taken during last month’s visit to China by Afghan Defence Minister Tariq Shah Bahrami.

Pragmatic cooperation

During his visit, Mr. Bahrami met his Chinese counterpart Chang Wanquan, and Xu Qiliang, Vice-Chairman of China’s Central Military Commission.

According to China Military Online, a website affiliated with the People’s Liberation Army, Gen. Xu said during his meeting with Mr. Barhami that China was willing to “strengthen pragmatic cooperation in areas of military exchange and anti-terrorism, and safeguard the security of the two countries and the region, making contributions to the development of China-Afghanistan strategic partnership of cooperation”.

FNA said Mr. Bahrami and his Chinese counterpart Gen. Chang Wanquan agreed that their counterterrorism focus should not only be confined to Badakhshan, but Afghanistan’s entire northern region.

Afghan analysts said the largest group of Uyghur militants already resides in Badakhshan, from where they can rapidly shift to China. The Afghan Defence Minister’s visit follows the first meeting of the foreign ministers of China, Pakistan and Afghanistan last month. “China has been able to establish itself as an honest broker in the eyes of the Afghans,” a source said.

The road that was built runs alongside the eastern bank of the blackened waters of the Siang river which flows as Yarlung Tsangpo from Tibet. While the Chinese have a path to enter right through the international border, Bishing does not have a motorable road of its own connecting it to the rest of the Indian territory. Villagers have to walk almost 4 km and then take a bridge across Siang by a bridge to reach Geling, which is the point where the motorable road ends.

So it seems Chinese are literally building a road on the Banks of Yarlung Zangbo/Siang/ Brahmaputra, this Road construction was probably related to the pollution found int he river last November.

Pl. read in the same context the post in the Ru td. I've said there that we cannot weaken our resolve against chinese aggression ..for decades and its building up Pak as its WMD proxy.With so many insults to India,stapled visas for example,$50B trade deficit,India should react and respond in kind to the Chinese assaults,diplomatic,military and economic. I don't expect the US cavalry to come to our rescue either.They just want us for cannon fodder as the West/Europeans did throughout the British Raj and during WW1 and WW2.We must fend for ourselves and peace is the time to prepare for war.Who was it who said that "Peace is the interlude between wars"?

PS:We've been helping Afghanistan for so long,why didn't we think of this before? This base will eventually become a de-facto Chin base in the country no matter what they say now! Furnished entirely with Chin mil. eqpt. it will keep the Afghans permanently relying upon them for after-gift support.

The mountains are about to get a lot less lonely. China has announced that they will be footing the bill for the construction and equipping of a new base in northern Afghanistan - although they’ll leave the manning of the base to the Afghans themselves.

Gen. Dawlat Waziri, a spokesman for the Afghan Defense Ministry, told the Fergana News Agency (FNA) that China is funding the base somewhere in the northeastern province of Badakhshan, which contains the 47-mile long mountainous border between the two countries.

Waziri added that Beijing would handle all material and technical expenses: weapons and uniforms, military equipment, infrastructure and everything else. The exact location of the base has yet to be determined, but FNA added that it would be the beginning of what was intended to be significant security and counterterror cooperation between Afghanistan and China in the former nation's northern regions.

A Pakistan security personnel stands guard near the the Beijing-funded megaport of Gwadar, in southwestern PakistanChina to Build Second Foreign Naval Base, This Time in Pakistan

The decision to build the base was made during a meeting between Chinese Defense Minister Chang Wanquan and his Afghan counterpart, Tariq Shah Bahrami, in December.

Xu Qiliang, the vice chairman of China's Central Military Commission, who also attended the meeting, told China Military Online that Beijing would build the base sometime in 2018 to "strengthen pragmatic cooperation in areas of military exchange and anti-terrorism and safeguard the security of the two countries and the region, making contributions to the development of China-Afghanistan strategic partnership of cooperation".

China isn't just doing it out of the kindness of their hearts, though. Badakhshan has increasingly become the home for Uighur militants who have used the Wakhjir Pass, the only crossing between the two countries, to move between Badakhshan and China's restive province of Xinjiang.

"China worries that Chinese Uighurs among the terrorists' ranks can cross into Chinese territory through Afghanistan and become a headache for the Chinese authorities," an anonymous Afghan security official told FNA.

The Uighur minority of Xinjiang have a contentious relationship with the Han Chinese-controlled Beijing, and the two groups live almost entirely separately despite Xinjiang being home to large populations of both. Uighurs cannot serve in the government while holding Islamic views, and generally live in poverty even by regional standards.

This has galvanized Uighur Islamic terrorist groups and subsequent Chinese government reprisals. Tensions exploded in mid-2009 when rioting Uighurs attacked Han Chinese in the regional capital of Urumqi, causing security forces to reply. Around 200 people were killed in a single day of rioting.

China to Build Pier at Djibouti Base to Support East Africa Naval MissionsCrossing between Afghanistan and China is extremely difficult because the Wakhjir Pass is closed to the public, has no road through it and is rendered impassable from ice and snow for about five months out of the year. However, militant and drug smuggling groups still manage to maintain routes through the pass.

China has been aggressively pushing for stronger ties with its impoverished and war-torn neighbor, mediating disputes between Afghanistan and Pakistan and offering to involve Kabul in the $60 billion China-Pakistan Economic Corridor they plan to build with Islamabad.

China today objected to Vietnam's invitation to India to invest in oil and natural gas sector in the disputed South China Sea, saying it is firmly opposed to infringement of its rights using development of bilateral ties as an "excuse".

Vietnam's Ambassador to India Ton Sinh Thanh on Tuesday had told an Indian news channel that his country would welcome Indian investments in the South China Sea.

Responding to remarks, Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Lu Kang said: "China does not object to the development of normal bilateral relations of relevant countries in our neighbourhood".

"But China firmly oppose relevant party to use it as an excuse to infringe upon China's legitimate rights and interests in the South China Sea and impair regional peace and stability," Lu said.

Ton had also said defence cooperation is one of the important and effective areas of cooperation between India and Vietnam and India can be helpful in expanding Vietnam's defence capabilities.

China has been opposing India's Oil and Natural Gas Corporation (ONGC) exploring oil in wells claimed by Vietnam in the South China Sea (SCS) for years. India has been asserting that the ONGC's exploration is a commercial operation and not connected with the dispute.

China claims almost all of the SCS while Vietnam, the Philippines, Malaysia, Brunei and Taiwan have counter claims.

Oil exploration in the SCS is a sensitive issue in the Vietnam-China relations. There were anti-China riots in Vietnam when China tried to deploy oil rigs in an areas claimed by Vietnam few years ago.

India, which is ramping up ties with Vietnam, calls for freedom of navigation in the SCS through which trillions of dollars of trade happens every year.

SSridhar wrote:China...is firmly opposed to infringement of its rights using development of bilateral ties as an "excuse". Vietnam's Ambassador to India Ton Sinh Thanh on Tuesday had told an Indian news channel that his country would welcome Indian investments in the South China Sea.

Riiiighttt! Makes sense. As an extension of that argument, India, too, should be opposed to infringement of its rights using development of bilateral ties (between chinistan and porkis in pok) as an "excuse". By the way, under the same convoluted logic, chini investments in any littoral states that border the Indian Ocean should be opposed by India.

The Philippines Permanent Representative to the UN, Teodoro L. Locsin Jr., questioned the basis of an Indo-Pacific concept saying it was “nowhere comparable to Asia-Pacific relationship to western economies.”

That basis is historical, much older than han's influence on the so called "china sea". Hindu influence in Philippines is over 1200 years old. The ambassador should know his country's cultural history by now.

Hinduism has a long historical influence in the Philippines, but recent archaeological and other evidence suggests Hinduism has had some cultural, economic, political and religious influence in the archipelago. Among these is the 9th century Laguna Copperplate Inscription found in 1989, deciphered in 1992 to be Kavi script (Pallava alphabet) with Sanskrit words; the golden Agusan statue discovered in another part of Philippines in 1917 has also been linked to Hinduism.

The Sanskrit ImpactOne of the first non-Austronesian languages to have a major impact on the Tagalog language was Sanskrit. Two routes by which Sanskrit could have impacted Tagalog, as well as the other languages spoken in the Philippines, are through direct trade, and through indirect culture movements traveling from India through the Malaysian Peninsula and on into the Philippines.

Beginning in the Fifth Century AD, trade in Southeast Asia erupted, and the interaction between the countries in this region of the world was boosted immensely. Traders sailed all over the Indian Ocean and the South China Sea to barter their goods. As a side-effect of this interaction, the languages interacted as well. One of these languages was Sanskrit, a language of India. As the traders mingled, words were borrowed and loaned throughout the region. The second way in which Sanskrit impacted Tagalog was through culture movements which slowly worked their way down through the Archipelago and into the island groups. The spread of Hindu was a major culture movement. With it, Hindu brought many new customs into these countries. New words had to be borrowed and created to allow for the new customs and traditions

China’s rise over the last generation has been impressive, with the country moving from the periphery to the center of the global system, and climbing from impoverished backwater to a position of substantial wealth and power. But the strategic environment in which China’s “lay low” approach to international affairs has helped to make it the world’s second-largest economy is changing – and a broader backlash against China is beginning.

Under President Xi Jinping, Beijing has been pushing an increasingly aggressive and high-profile foreign policy, attracting the sort of attention that Xi’s predecessors had carefully avoided. Now, countries that only a few years ago welcomed Chinese investment and engagement are beginning to mobilize against Chinese influence.

The global conditions that favored China’s rise began at the end of the Cold War. With the fall of the Soviet Union, the West in general and the United States in particular were eager to bring additional countries into the world order they felt they had created.Throughout the 1990s, faith in the liberalizing power of commerce, and in Francis Fukuyama’s thesis that the West’s triumph over Soviet socialism heralded the “End of History,” was at its height. As a consequence, concerns about China’s autocratic model were largely shelved in Western capitals.

The United States in particular pushed for China’s accession to the World Trade Organization, which ultimately served as an inflection point in China’s economic growth.

In the 21st century, Washington has focused most of its strategic attention on Islamist terrorism, the Middle East and Afghanistan, while Europe has been preoccupied with the euro and the growth of the European Union. Only Japan has maintained solid strategic focus on Chinese power ambition over the last generation.

While this was happening, Beijing played its hand skillfully. Decades earlier, when China first embarked on its economic reform project, Deng Xiaoping, China’s leader until his death in 1997, urged subsequent generations of leaders to maintain a low international profile. Espousing the dictum of “taoguang yanghui,” (literally “Hide Brightness, Cultivate Obscurity,” but typically translated in English as “Lay Low and Bide Your Time,”) Deng advocated avoiding flashy shows of power in order to shield Chinese efforts from outside scrutiny while the country wasn’t positioned to handle them properly.

Eschewing high-profile diplomacy, China kept its bilateral focus on commerce and investment, with a consistent emphasis on “win-win” cooperation, which helped win friends. At the United Nations, Chinese diplomats generally allowed Russia to take the lead in disputes over Western activities. During the global backlash against the Iraq war, Beijing was able to present itself favorably, even launching the China-Europe Strategic Partnership in 2003, allegedly to create an alternative to American unipolar power.

The creation of the BRIC Forum for emerging economies in 2009 extended this argument of “China the Reliable Partner” to developing countries outside the West. Throughout this period, and despite its growing wealth and power, Beijing was able to cultivate just enough ambiguity about its intentions to frustrate skeptics in its partner countries. From Australian mines to Confucius institutes in Western universities, the expansion continued.

The last five years upended nearly all of this in very short order. Indirect diplomatic suggestions have been swapped for attention-grabbing proposals, strategic ambiguity has been abandoned for international military bases, high-profile drills, showy parades and standoffs with neighboring countries.

Fueled by large state-subsidized loans, large Chinese firms were sent on international buying binges, scooping up the Waldorf Astoria in New York City and a series of famous brands such as GE and Volvo, prompting fears among some Western legislators that the acquisitions might give the Chinese government influence over crucial commercial assets.

In Africa too, there is increasing concern that China’s investments on the continent are less about partnership and investment than they are about Beijing trying to win naked political influence – and importing unfair labor practices – in resource-rich countries.

After solidifying his control over the Chinese Communist Party in late 2017, Xi appears to have accelerated these changes. The Communist Party’s United Work Front division has begun to enforce guidelines on the behavior of Chinese university students studying overseas.

In September, Chinese scholars at the University of California, San Diego, said that a branch of China’s Ministry of Education had frozen their funding after the university invited the Dalai Lama to speak at its commencement ceremony – a measure interpreted as part of Beijing’s efforts to suppress viewpoints contrary to Communist Party dogma.

And finally, Xi Jinping’s signature “One Belt, One Road” infrastructure initiative, a catchall term for hundreds of billions of planned outbound investment, has recently led to China seizing ownership of a port in Sri Lanka after local entities defaulted on the extremely onerous terms that China had demanded. The local outcry was substantial, putting further China – Sri Lanka cooperation in the crosshairs and serving as a warning to other countries receiving Chinese investment.

Where China had chosen for the last generation to cultivate an image of itself that stood for partnership and resistance to ‘Western imperialism’, Xi Jinping has now tossed it out in favor of an image of a proud, swaggering Great Power that evinces little concern for how its actions are perceived abroad. Clearly, he judges this to be in the political interest of the party, which often uses nationalist rhetoric to bolster its domestic standing. Anti-China trade sentiment has now bubbled up high enough in the United States that Washington’s new strategic directive admits China to be an adversarial “revisionist power,” where softer language had been preferred in the past. Canadian and Australian politicians are starting to show substantial skepticism about Chinese involvement domestically. In Australia, a recent scandal involving payments made to a senator from a Chinese-connected businessman has led to Canberra announcing plans to ban foreigners from donating to Australian political parties.

Even usually-close ally Pakistan – itself part of the broader One Belt, One Road program – has been on the receiving end of Chinese over-promising and under-delivering, with Beijing reported to have abruptly stopped funding for three major Pakistani roads in the project known as the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor. And just this week, French President Emmanuel Macron took the unusual step of cautioning China publicly that the Belt and Road projects “cannot be those of a new hegemony, which would transform those that they cross into vassals.” Other pushback to Chinese projects is likely only beginning.

Modern China has never faced simultaneous suspicion of its motives and objectives in both the West and the developing world. Beijing’s diplomats are more experienced at sidestepping or deflecting critics than at engaging them, and the party’s domestic politics demand a near-absolute protection of “core interests.”

This does not bode well for a country that will have to start addressing legitimate diplomatic concerns around the world. How Beijing handles this backlash will reveal what kind of a country it plans to be, and how it will handle this new role in the world.

Under President Xi Jinping, Beijing has been pushing an increasingly aggressive and high-profile foreign policy, attracting the sort of attention that Xi’s predecessors had carefully avoided. Now, countries that only a few years ago welcomed Chinese investment and engagement are beginning to mobilize against Chinese influence.

The problem is that the "West" expected China to follow a more western model - the usual culprit, democracy, open this and open that. China took advantage of capitalism but wheeled inwards on the political front, Xi embracing a viral variant of communism. And, now Xi wants to export his model - with China as the center of the universe.

If this is the same guyhttps://www.linkedin.com/in/peter-marino-37791338/"Executive Director at The Metropolitan Society for International AffairsThe Metropolitan Society for International Affairs, London School of Economics and Political ScienceGreater New York City Area "Lists his languages as Chinese and Classical Chinese.

dnivas wrote:laughable how they can use one line for Vietnam and one for TSP. Glad india has stuck its nose into SCS, just to see the hypocrisy coming out of Beijing

The Chinese think they are smart and when questioned on such issues, they give a totally convoluted, unconvincing and blatantly false excuses. We have called the Chinese bluff several times before.

In the 19th ASEAN Summit in mid-November, 2011 at Bali, Man Mohan Singh told Chinese Prime Minister Wen Jiabao that Indian activities were purely ‘commercial’ and issues of sovereignty needed to be settled ‘according to international laws and practices’. However, the Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson, in response to a question on Prime Minister Man Mohan Singh’s assertion of commercial venture, said on Nov. 21, 2011 that “We don't hope to see outside forces involved in the South China Sea dispute and do not want to see foreign companies engage in activities that will undermine China's sovereignty and interest.”When questioned a few years back as to why China disputed India’s presence in oil exploration in South China Sea while she herself was building dams and roads in disputed PoK, Mr. Sun, Deputy Director-General of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs gave a very baffling answer. He said that the South Indo China Sea dispute was “very complex” and involved many parties. China was trying to discuss the issue with other countries with overlapping claims. In PoK, China's “only focus” was on the development of the local economy. “It doesn't mean” that China had ratified Pakistan's claim to the territory. “The dispute [over the PoK] is between India and Pakistan. So, whenever there are disputes or tensions, China will not be judgmental. Therefore, I don't think they should be mixed”.

India has always made its intentions clear on this matter several times.

In September 2014, just a few days ahead of the Chinese President Xi Jinping’s India visit, the Indian President, Pranab Mukkherji, paid a four-day state visit to Vietnam and the two countries signed seven agreements including oil exploration in two blocks by India’s OVL. Commenting on this, the Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson said, "If such agreement concerns waters administered by China or if such cooperation project is not approved by the Chinese government, then we will be concerned about such an agreement and we will not support it." Responding to queries, the Pranab Mukherjee said that the blocks were located well within Vietnam’s territorial waters. He also said, “India’s oil exploration activities in the South China Sea since 1988 are only commercial actions, and no political angularity should be drawn into it … India’s foreign policy never looks at any country through the prism of any third country.”

It is in this context that Modi's latest assumes significance. Modi said India does not covet the territory of other countries, nor does it wish to exploit the resources of others.

If this is the same guyhttps://www.linkedin.com/in/peter-marino-37791338/"Executive Director at The Metropolitan Society for International AffairsThe Metropolitan Society for International Affairs, London School of Economics and Political ScienceGreater New York City Area "Lists his languages as Chinese and Classical Chinese.

Agreed, in fact I too had searched and found this info, but couldnt post as I was on mobile. The main point I was trying to make is that even in the land of "Game Changer CPEC", articles like these are being published. Syndicate or not, without approval from ISPR, the editor should accept a phonecall/visit in the name of 'mulk ki izzat'. Unless of course deep CPEC money has not been greasing palms

China on Friday became Nepal’s second internet service provider, breaking India’s monopoly in providing internet access to the Himalayan Kingdom.

The Hong Kong and Beijing based China Telecom Global (CTG) — a company formed in 2012 — has teamed up with Nepal Telecom to provide alternate cyber-connectivity to Nepal.

So far, Nepal had been linked to the global internet network through Indian telecom operators, using optical fiber connections in Biratnagar, Bhairahawa and Birgunj, among others.

But a new terrestrial fiber cable launched in 2016 by CTG will now connect Nepal and China through the Jilong (Rasuwagadhi) border gateway. Media reports in Nepal say that the new fiber link extends to China’s Hong Kong Data Center — one of Asia’s largest global data centers.

Last month CTG paired with Daily-Tech, a developer and operator of data center infrastructure across China, and Global Switch, a leading data center in Europe, to launch a state-of-the art data center in Hong Kong.

The Chinese side views its Nepal venture as part of a larger digital network of countries along the New Silk Road.

“We want to build a grand corridor and a big platform for telecommunication. I’d call this an ‘information-centered high-speed link’ along the Belt and Road routes. This offers our company a great opportunity. This opportunity also belongs to all of our partner companies participating in the Belt and Road Initiative. We can develop together,” says Deng Xiaofeng, CTG’s general manager, in an interview with the state-broadcaster China Global Television Network (CGTN).

Mr. Deng highlighted that following the Nepal project, CTG has expanded Internet services to Pakistan, Laos and Thailand.

China’s latest initiative is part of a larger effort to provide landlocked Nepal with additional physical and digital connectivity.

The Nepali website, Online Khabar is reporting that the new left alliance-led government, apparently well-disposed towards China, is keen to construct a 4.2 km road tunnel that will shorten travel time to two-and-a half hours from Kathmandu to Rasuwagadhi — the cross border point with China.

The website that the Nepali government has already approached the Beijing based Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB) for support in funding the project.

Separately, China appears to be making efforts to build ties in the Nepal’s Terai plains area, where Indian influence is seemingly strong.

Xinhua is reporting that China is funneling humanitarian aid through the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) that will benefit 31,800 household in the Terai region, which was hit by floods last August.

A post-flood assessment conducted by the government of Nepal found that 1.7 million people were affected by the disaster.

India cannot allow its neighbours to drift away from it to counter an assertive China, Army chief Gen. Bipin Rawat said today, affirming that time has come for the country to shift focus from western to the northern frontier.

Rawat said countries like Nepal, Bhutan, Myanmar, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka and Afghanistan have to be kept on board as part of a broader strategy to deal with China, and India must make "wholehearted" efforts to continue extending support to them.

Addressing the media on the eve of the Army Day, Rawat acknowledged that China was exerting pressure on India along the border but at the same time asserted that the Indian Army was fully capable of dealing with any security challenge on the northern frontier.

"I think we cannot allow the neighbourhood to be drifted away from us --whether it is Nepal, Bhutan, Myanmar, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka or Afghanistan. These nations have to be kept on board, and I think we have to put in our wholehearted effort to ensure we continue to support them," he said.

China has been trying to expand its influence in countries in India's neighbourhood including Maldives, Nepal, Sri Lanka and Myanmar, which have traditionally close ties with New Delhi.

"We are seeking support of other nations, group of nations in the region, to see that we are not isolated completely in a situation in Asia against an assertive China. That is the next step that is being taken and therefore you will find that a quadrilateral is formed," said Rawat.

In November last year, India, Japan, Australia and the US had set the ball rolling for forming a quadrilateral coalition in the Indo-Pacific region to pursue their common interests, a move seen as a measure to counter growing Chinese influence.

He said there are other countries that are coming on board to support India in whatever way they can.

"At the military level, we know that if there is a threat from China, we have to be prepared for it," he said.

Rawat also underlined the need for shifting attention from the western border with Pakistan to the northern frontier with China.

"For too long, we have kept our focus on the western front. I think time has come for us to focus on the northern border. Therefore our infrastructure development on the northern border has to be speeded up," he said.

At the militarty level, the Army Chief said, India's engagement with almost all nations of the region are of a high order, and added the Army is concentrating more on the neighbourhood than beyond.

He said, by keeping these nations with it, India would be able to make sure that the assertiveness that China is showing against it is balenced in some way.

"That is the approach we are taking. We know China is a powerful country but let us also not forget that we are not a weak nation. Let's not get so worried. We are dealing with the situation. We are confident we will be able to handle the situation," he said.

Troops of India and China were locked in a 73-day-long standoff in Doklam since June 16 after the Indian side stopped construction of a road in the disputed area by the Chinese Army. Bhutan and China have a dispute over Doklam. The face- off had ended on August 28.

Chinese authorities are publicly scolding the U.S. airline for listing Taiwan and Tibet as "countries" on its website.

China's civil aviation regulator has contacted Delta and instructed the company to rectify the issue immediately, according to a notice posted on the agency's website Friday.

"It was an inadvertent error with no business or political intention, and we apologize deeply for the mistake," the company said in a statement to CNNMoney. "As one of our most important markets, we are fully committed to China and to our Chinese customers."

Taiwan appeared in the list of countries on Delta's website in both Chinese and English on Friday. It wasn't immediately clear where Tibet was referred to as a country.

Also on Friday, Shanghai's internet authority summoned representatives of European clothing retailer Zara, chastising the company for listing Taiwan as a "country" and ordering it to rectify the situation immediately.

Authorities in Shanghai are investigating hotel giant Marriott after it triggered an online uproar with a customer questionnaire that listed Chinese-claimed regions such as Tibet and Hong Kong as separate countries.

Marriott has issued an apology and amended the online questionnaire, which asked members of the chain's customer rewards programme to list their country of residence, giving Tibet, Hong Kong, Macau, and Taiwan as possible options.

Anger over Marriott's mistake snowballed after it was posted on the Communist Youth League's official account on Weibo, China's popular Twitter-like platform.

Shanghai authorities said they met with Marriott's management earlier this week to demand that the offending materials be corrected and that the company do its best to rectify the "bad influence" from the affair.

Marriott has said it was "deeply sorry” and wished to "reiterate our usual stand in respecting China’s sovereignty and territorial integrity".

How to Stop China from Someday Invading Taiwan? Submarines.8, to be exact.

The country with perhaps the most dire need for a modern submarine force in the industrialized world actually has the oldest. Fully half of Taiwan’s submarine force consists of World War II–era boats, while the other half is “just” forty years old. The result is a force that is unable to respond to China’s submarine fleet and cannot adequately protect the country from invasion.

While invasion is still impractical, the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) grows stronger daily. In its 2017 annual report to Congress, the Pentagon estimates that Taiwan’s military forces are badly outnumbered by regional PLA forces. China outnumbers Taiwan twenty-four to four in destroyers, forty-two to twenty-two in frigates and seventy-five to forty in coastal missile patrol boats. In submarines, China outnumbers Taiwan thirty-four to four.

A powerful Taiwanese submarine fleet would go a long way towards deterring a Chinese invasion. A submarine threat to a ship-bound invasion force would cause considerable unease to a People’s Liberation Army Navy entrusted to delivering tens, if not hundreds of thousands of combat troops across hostile waters onto Taiwanese beaches.

I don't disagree with your POV. Importing oil through these ports is not sensible. What I am saying is- China hopes to control ingress of oil into MSR countries only via own ports. Ports built and operated by Chinese act like holding positions for tankers if hostilities break out. The tankers also provide oil to MSR countries priced in yuan. What use if yuan to a third nation? Just like what use is dollar to a third nation? Let's say if petrodollar becomes petroyuan, the MSR countries would happily recycle yuan to get their own oil from Chinese tankers or if needed from elsewhere if Saudi accepts yuan.For eg.Goods come from china in bakistan, bakis pay in yuan. If yuan are not easy to get, they pay in kind. Guarantees of tankers remaining safe is payment in kind.

I know all these things seem imaginary, but I can't see how MSR will work when the only nations participating in it are 'bhooka-nanga '. What is the bigger game?

nam wrote:China will either try to do this with SCO or see to it that big Asian power don't trouble.

What can we do : economy and technology. Hold the fort in IOR. Our geography makes sure we will be a dagger in to IOR.

Let the Chinese deal with Indo-China SEA first. Indian OCEAN is too big a fish to fry. I am not underestimating the Chinese. But here and in Twitter especially amongst western commentators the Chinese are the monster under the bed which has got bigger and meaner than what it really is.

Chandragupta wrote:Chola ji, you're right about the machinery part but that was a different time and age. Having seen the Chinese manufacturing behemoth, I just don't see it happening on a similar scale or even 1/10th of that scale in India. Sounds pessimistic I know but that's what I feel.

But India does not need to emulate China. Why manufacture for the world? It makes no sense. The environmental destruction as a consequence of the behemoth is not what India wants and needs.

The Chinese – IMHO - are playing ONLY ONE GAME. Ultimate control of the Indian and Eastern Pacific Oceans.

In the Indian Ocean they find that despite all the Threats, Invitations etc. especially by way of CPEC, OBOR and maybe other Schemes with “catchy” Acronyms India just refuse to join the Chinese Project/s.

Thus the Invitations to India offering to change/amend the “Acronyms” etc. except that India REFUSES TO TAKE THE BAIT! Terroristan, Sri Lanka, Myanmar, Thailand, Viet Nam, Laos, Cambodia, Philippines and may be Malaysia and possibly Indonesia. But even these do not cut any Ice with the Indians!

China has obviated the need for a replacement of Malacca Straits for Oil Tankers by construction a Gas as well as Oil Pipe Lines by building the Port of Kyaukpyu – about 60-80 Miles South East from Sitwe (Old name Akyab) – which can handle VLCC Class of tankers of 300,000 Tonnes Size.

For the smaller Dry Cargo Vessel – if push comes to shove – they are exploring the Kra Canal – just North of the Thailand / Malaysia Border. KRA CANAL

As such the OBOR – CPEC – Terroristan - Gwadar, Sri Lanka – Hambantota – Bangladesh – Kyuakpyu & Thailand plus possible more are a way to finally get India to join the Chinese "Control Scheme", which seemingly at this moment, is an outlandish Chinese dream.

Gwadar will be basically to get a Sea Route for Xinjiang Exports and for this the Terroristanis are selling their country down the river. You will note that all the OIC Group especially the Arab Countries and Iran have not said a Dickie Bird about the steadily dwindling Muslim population content in Xinjiang from 94% in 1949 to about 55% now with the Uyghurs being about 44%, same as the present Han content which does not include the Chinese “Xinjiang Building Corps” - at last count about Two Million Hans - or some such name which is busy building infrastructure projects and “re-populating” Xinjiang.

As such Gwadar will go down the way of Hambantota and the Chinese Section of the Colombo Development.

Please note that in the Sixties and Seventies Japan was getting PG Oil in the the 480,000 Tonner “Globtik Tokyo” and then the Largest ULCC named Knock Nevis of just over 560,000 Tonnes. These ships used the Lambok Straits for the Loaded Leg and the Malacca Straits fot he Ballast Leg.

So the Chinese do not need Gwadi-wadi-yaar for the Terroristani much Touted Oil Pipe Line!

Request : Please let me know the meaning of the Term M S R as it is not in the BRF Glossary.Cheers

Peregrine wrote:The Chinese – IMHO - are playing ONLY ONE GAME. Ultimate control of the Indian and Eastern Pacific Oceans.

Peregrine ji, IMO, the Chinese are playing only one game right now and that is control of Indo-China Sea.

China wants to dominate what it calls the 'First Island Chain', that is, the arc from Japan in the north to Philippines in the east to Taiwan in the south and Indonesia in the west.

They need to control the ICS mainly for three reasons. One, to be able to freely pursue a short, swift war to invade and occupy Taiwan if and when needed without other powers such as the US or alliances such as the Quad stopping it. If they can hold off for ten days, they will subsume Taiwan, it is their thinking. Two, of course, consume the riches of ICS. Three, establish hegemony as the Middle Kingdom.

But, for that, they have to secure the two flanks, the stretch from Africa to Melakka of the IOR and Western Pacific.

When Xi speaks of c.2035 for modernization of armed forces, my interpretation is that this is what he means, being capable of holding off other power(s) in ICS while PRC swiftly completes the task of integrating Taiwan with the Mainland.

As with every Chinese strategy, they hope to achieve multiple benefits in one stroke. They are therefore perfectly happy that, in this process, they are also stringing India with the pearls.

Learning from the Doklam experience, the Indo-Tibetan Border Police (ITBP) will soon have an air wing primarily for reconnaissance so that transgressions by the People's Liberation Army (PLA), troop build-up and construction activities across the border can be spotted in time.

For starters, two twin-engined helicopters are being procured, which will be used for recce, transportation of combat troops, evacuation of dead, injured and sick jawans, supplying rations and flying VIPs at altitudes of 16,000-18,000 feet in the Himalayas.

Sources said the ITBP helicopters will operate from its bases in Chandigarh and Borjhar (Guwahati), covering almost the whole 3,488-km-long border with China, from J&K to Himachal Pradesh, Uttarakhand and the northeast region, including Sikkim. The process to acquire the helicopters on wet lease has been initiated.

It is good that GoI is showing some urgency to this matter. Hope, sooner than later, ITBP will get more of these assets and operate from much closer to the LAC bases.

panduranghari wrote:But India does not need to emulate China. Why manufacture for the world? It makes no sense. The environmental destruction as a consequence of the behemoth is not what India wants and needs.

If India does not have the capability to export - India will import massively, as simple as that!

The world has moved on to a winner takes all model with the only the best from around the world surviving in various industries. Therefore every manufacturer in India needs to benchmark to the best in the world... which can only come from a higher export focus. If Indian firms do not have the capability to export - that industry will soon be vacated to imports.

Arjun ji,Why are we reverting to the Gandhian village and handicrafts bogeyman again?Are Chinese doing handicrafts? No. Do you think I am in anyway alluding to us doing this too? No. So why put words into my mouth.

Old data but the Chinese exports are falling. Even after their currency has devalued the exports are lower than what they were. It does not suggest their business model is working i.e. export driven behemoth is not what China really is. I do give in to the fact that they are getting to higher end goods market, but I do not have any evidence to prove this growth is organic. It could be or it could be based on theft of intellectual property.

Peregrine wrote:The Chinese – IMHO - are playing ONLY ONE GAME. Ultimate control of the Indian and Eastern Pacific Oceans.

SSridhar wrote:Peregrine ji, IMO, the Chinese are playing only one game right now and that is control of Indo-China Sea.

China wants to dominate what it calls the 'First Island Chain', that is, the arc from Japan in the north to Philippines in the east to Taiwan in the south and Indonesia in the west.

They need to control the ICS mainly for three reasons. One, to be able to freely pursue a short, swift war to invade and occupy Taiwan if and when needed without other powers such as the US or alliances such as the Quad stopping it. If they can hold off for ten days, they will subsume Taiwan, it is their thinking. Two, of course, consume the riches of ICS. Three, establish hegemony as the Middle Kingdom.

But, for that, they have to secure the two flanks, the stretch from Africa to Melakka of the IOR and Western Pacific.

When Xi speaks of c.2035 for modernization of armed forces, my interpretation is that this is what he means, being capable of holding off other power(s) in ICS while PRC swiftly completes the task of integrating Taiwan with the Mainland.

As with every Chinese strategy, they hope to achieve multiple benefits in one stroke. They are therefore perfectly happy that, in this process, they are also stringing India with the pearls.

SSridhar Ji :An Excellent Elucidation. Makes it all Clear. Crystal.

However, as to the statement "they are also stringing India with the pearls" one can say "Not Yet -even though China has Trussed up Terroristan like a Turkey (The Bird - not the country) but in the case of India, China might adorn it with a Pearl Necklace however China cannot - IMHO - attain "Stringing India with Pearls". At least not yet with Modi Ji around. Long may he live.

China today criticised Indian Army chief Gen Bipin Rawat for his recent comments, saying they were "unconstructive" and went against the consensus reached by leaders of both nations to bring ties back on track and preserve preserve peace on the border.

The Chinese reaction came following comments by Gen Rawat two days ago that India needs to shift focus from its border with Pakistan to that of China and spoke of pressure being exerted by Beijing along the Line of Actual Control.

"Last year, India-China relations have witnessed some twists and turns but Chinese President Xi Jinping and Prime Minister Narendra Modi during their meeting on the sidelines of the BRICS meeting last September reached a consensus to bring the ties back on track," Chinese foreign ministry spokesman Lu Kang said here.

Lu also said recent efforts by both countries to enhance dialogue on consultation have shown sound momentum of improvement and development.

"Under such background, the unconstructive remarks by the Indian senior official (Rawat) not only go against the consensus reached by the two heads of state but also do not conform to the efforts made by the two sides to improve and develop bilateral relations," Lu said.

The remarks "cannot help to preserve tranquillity and peace at the border areas," he said.

"China and India are important neighbours. They are both at a critical stage of the national development and rejuvenation. The two countries should enhance strategic communication and eliminate strategic doubt and conduct strategic cooperation," he said.

"We urge the Indian side to follow through on the important consensus of the two leaders to do more things to preserve peace and stability on the border areas and refrain from doing things which may complicate the situation, constructively handle the relevant affairs and promote steady development of bilateral relations.

"This serves the common interest of the whole region and the interest of the Indian side," he said.

Asked what were Gen Rawat's specific comments that China is taking exception to, Lu pointed to the Army chief's comments on Dokalam.

"I have made myself clear, if the senior official according to the report referred to Donglang - I think you are clear about our position - Donglang belongs to China and has always been in the effective jurisdiction of China," he said.

About Gen Rawat's comments that China is exerting pressure on India along the LAC, he said "if he refers to the situation on the whole India-China boundary, I have also said that last September the two heads of state have reached important consensus during the Xiamen (BRICS) summit".

"Both sides have maintained effective communication since then. The aim is to enhance strategic mutual trust and create enabling atmosphere for strategic communication. Recently bilateral relations have shown positive momentum," he said referring to Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi's visit to India in December followed by the 20th round of border talks between India and China, led by NSA Ajit Doval and Chinese State Councillor Yang Jiechi.

"On such background, the official mentioned by you made such kind of remarks that go against the consensus of the states and do not conform to the general trend of improvement of bilateral relations. We believe such kinds of remarks are not conducive to maintaining peace and tranquillity in border areas," he said.

He did not directly respond to a question about Gen Rawat's earlier remarks about major reduction of Chinese troops from the Dokalam area and reiterated China's stand that the area belonged to China.

Lu also took exception to Gen Rawat's remarks that Dokalam, where the two armies engaged in a 73-day standoff last year, was disputed territory between Bhutan and China.

"I want to point out that the remarks of the Army chief mentioned by you once again showed that the illegal trespass of the Indian border troops is quite clear cut in nature. Donglang (Dokalam) belongs to China. The Sikkim section of the the boundary has been delimited by the historical convention," he said.

Donglang is China's territory, he said adding that "China will continue to exercise its sovereign rights in Donglang area in accordance with the historical convention and steadfastly uphold its territorial sovereignty".

"We require the Indian military to learn lessons and abide by the historical convention and earnestly uphold the peace and tranquillity of the border areas and create sound atmosphere for the political development of bilateral relations," he said.

Rawat had said the People's Liberation Army has occupied the area in the west of Torsa nullah called northern Dokalam.

"At the actual spot the two sides have disengaged. The tents remain. The observation posts remain. This is a territory disputed between Bhutan and China," he had said.

Indian and Chinese troops were locked in a 73-day standoff in Dokalam that began on June 16 last year after the Indian side stopped construction of a road in the disputed area by the PLA. The face-off ended on August 28.

The Indian Army is very well prepared everywhere and China is unlikely to try any misadventure any more, GOC-in-C, Eastern Command, Lt Gen Abhay Krishna said today.

He was referring to the latest incident of a Chinese road-building team breaching into Indian territory at Tuting in Arunachal Pradesh.

Krishna said the Indian Army was there and the Chinese had to retreat leaving behind their equipment.

"We are very well prepared all over. In Tuting, we were there and they had to run away leaving their equipment behind. I don't think they will try any of these misadventures any more," Lt Gen Krishna, General Officer Commanding-in-Chief, Eastern Army Command told newspersons here on the occasion of Army Day.

Krisha said this in reply to a question on the preparedness of the Indian Army following the 74-day Doklam standoff at the India-China-Bhutan tri-junction over Chinese road-building efforts inside Bhutanese territory.

Asked whether the Indian Army returned the road construction equipment to the Chinese in Tuting that they had left behind, he said it has been given back to them a few days after.

"We are a very mature nation. So we have returned it. It was returned after few days when they came back and negotiated. We identified to them the line on the ground that from here onwards you cannot get across because the Indian territory starts from there.

"They understood all that and they apologised. They said that it was possibly a mistake on the part of the people on the ground and it won't happen again," the GOC-in-C said.

"We are there, we are prepared for any eventuality. We will do our best and give our best to safeguard the territorial integrity," he asserted.

Krishna said that there has been no change in status quo at Doklam since August 28.

He said that the Army is developing logistics and infrastructure on the strategic Bramhaputra River that flows down from China into Arunachal and then into Assam.

"Troops have to move fast in case of any eventuality. The entire Indian Army can't be sitting on the border all the time. We are spread all over, so we need to have all the means available to reach in the least possible time. So we need all these resources available," the Eastern Army Commander said.

Answering a query on available logistics and infrastructure in remote areas in the north-east in view of the recent incursion near Tuting, he said the Indian Army has its footprints everywhere.

"Every area cannot be so well prepared. Arunachal is a huge state, but we have our footprints everywhere and it is our job to reach there. We don't have to have a road to reach everywhere," he said.

All these areas are under surveillance, he said that while some areas are patrolled regularly, some are checked periodically depending on what the forces visualise and anticipate.

Krishna said that raising of the Mountain Strike Core was going on.

Asked whether some units of the core would be based in West Bengal, he said the Mountain Strike Core has a number of units and "so obviously they will be spread."

panduranghari wrote:Let the Chinese deal with Indo-China SEA first. Indian OCEAN is too big a fish to fry. I am not underestimating the Chinese. But here and in Twitter especially amongst western commentators the Chinese are the monster under the bed which has got bigger and meaner than what it really is.

One of the aspect about the Chinese, is that the West has not faced an entity with 1.3 billion people and 12 trillion GDP. So enough people to fight any war for decades and also rich!

With Soviet it was not a major economy and heavily dependent on oil. Their population was less than that of US. The Chinese learned from the Soviets. They waited until they had big GDP before flapping their wings.

What was the American GDP when it created 11 100K aircraft carrier? The fear is now Chinese have enough money to build 11 100k carriers if required AND people to build it fast! Even if they build a 500 ship navy, it will not go bankrupt.

Will the Chinese be able to defeat the US in a war? Does not matter. War is very unpredictable. It is about what happens in peace, not war. The Chinese are trying to dominate in peace, without going to war.

Old data but the Chinese exports are falling. Even after their currency has devalued the exports are lower than what they were. It does not suggest their business model is working i.e. export driven behemoth is not what China really is.

China has been moving from an export to an internal consumption economy. We should expect their exports to decline.